"had to" could be too strong a phrase, but not entirely wrong in a way:
>> Apple can currently just take the ZFS CDDL code and incorporate it (like they did with DTrace), but it may be that they wanted a "private license" from Sun (with appropriate technical support and indemnification), and the two entities couldn't come to mutually agreeable terms.
> I cannot disclose details, but that is the essence of it.
>> Apple can currently just take the ZFS CDDL code and incorporate it (like they did with DTrace), but it may be that they wanted a "private license" from Sun (with appropriate technical support and indemnification), and the two entities couldn't come to mutually agreeable terms.
> I cannot disclose details, but that is the essence of it.
* https://marc.info/?l=zfs-discuss&m=125642378308127
* https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2009/10/apple-abandons-zfs-o...
There was a NetApp-Sun legal spat going on due to NetApp's WAFL patents (Sun won IIRC), and indemnification could have been a source of tension.